Off Topic Covid 19 restrictions have done one

It’s obvious… they’ve drank all the toilet cleaner.

 

Any alternative thoughts on these claims?

 

Rand Paul. Arf.

 

What does a drag queen know about covid?


The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.

 

The two sides of AstraZeneca’s vaccine ‘miracle’
Jamie Scott was fit and healthy before the jab, but it nearly killed him – now, he and others like him are suing the firm behind the drug

Robert Mendick, CHIEF REPORTER30 April 2024 • 8:00pm


Jamie Scott is nothing if not a fighter. He must be to have survived a reaction to his Covid-19 vaccine so violent that hospital doctors phoned his wife three times to tell her to get to his bedside because he was about to die. Each time he pulled through.

Fit and healthy before the jab, the 47-year-old father-of-two has suffered a permanent brain injury that prevents him from working. Or even being able to look after his children on his own for anything more than an hour.

Photographs released to The Telegraph show Mr Scott in intensive care, a spaghetti of tubes keeping him alive. Scarring snakes all the way round his scalp, the result of an emergency craniotomy that removed part of his skull to reduce swelling on the brain that was about to kill him.


The scars on Jamie Scott's head after emergency surgery
The battle to stay alive was, however, just the beginning. In the past three years, Mr Scott and his indomitable wife Kate have waged a war to get fair compensation for themselves and other victims of the jab. They are Davids fighting the twin Goliaths of AstraZeneca, the pharmaceutical giant, and the might of the British government. It is proving a daunting, frustrating and at times heartbreakingly impossible challenge.


AstraZeneca is one of the UK’s biggest companies, the second largest in the FTSE 100, worth a staggering £185 billion. Business is so good that Sir Pascal Soriot, its chief executive, is the highest paid among FTSE-100 bosses.

Yet this week, as AstraZeneca confirmed Sir Pascal’s annual salary would rise to £18.7 million, The Telegraph obtained court documents that showed the pharmaceuticals firm was admitting for the first time in legal proceedings that its vaccine can “in very rare cases” cause an illness which is fatal about 20 per cent of the time. When its symptoms of blood clots and low blood plate counts are not deadly it leaves its victims with devastating injuries. In the same documents, AstraZeneca accepts that it has no idea why the vaccine, developed in conjunction with the University of Oxford, should do that. “The causal mechanism is not known,” the company said in correspondence with Jamie Scott’s lawyers.

It’s a legal mess made more complicated because the Government indemnified AstraZeneca and other Covid vaccine-makers ahead of the mass rollout that began to much fanfare in December 2020. In other words, though AstraZeneca is one of the UK’s wealthiest businesses (it generated revenue of £37bn in 2023) it will be the British taxpayer that will foot any legal bills and damages should Mr Scott and 50 other claimants win their class action suit against the company. The details of the indemnification agreement have never been made public.


Jamie being treated by a nurse
In the legal case, AstraZeneca is accused of playing hardball, but it is unclear whether behind the scenes the UK Treasury is baulking at any payout. For the victims, it is simply prolonging their agony.

Advertisement
All this is a far cry from those heady days when Oxford and AstraZeneca were lauded for effectively saving the world, inventing and then manufacturing a cost-effective Covid vaccine that had enabled the world to get back to normal. Boris Johnson had hailed the Oxford-AZ vaccine as a “triumph for British science” when it was given approval for use in the UK back in December 2020. In June 2021 the crowd on Wimbledon’s Centre Court was so grateful that Dame Sarah Gilbert, one of the Oxford professors who masterminded its discovery, was given a rousing standing ovation normally reserved for tennis champions.

One independent study estimated that the Oxford-AZ vaccine had saved as many as six million lives worldwide in the first year of the global vaccine rollout. But by as early as February 2021, problems were also becoming clear.

On extremely rare occasions, recipients of the jab had a terrible adverse reaction called vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis, or VITT for short. On a number of death certificates, coroners have put VITT as the cause of death although AstraZeneca does not seemingly recognise the term, preferring instead to call it TTS, which stands for thrombosis with thrombocytopenia. The crucial term ‘vaccine-induced’ is generally omitted in AstraZeneca’s correspondence.

Advertisement
In the case of Jamie Scott (and many others), the Government itself has accepted that VITT was responsible for his brain damage and paid him £120,000 out of a separate fund called the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS). The scheme has been branded wholly inadequate, the one-off payment having remained at a level set in 2007. For someone like Scott, the career loss of earnings – he was a successful IT manager – dwarfs the payout he has received through the scheme.


Jamie Scott, pictured with wife Kate before the pandemic, can no longer look after his children on his own for anything more than an hour
In total, the Government’s own scheme has paid the £120,000 compensation in 163 cases. At least 158 went to recipients of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. In other words, alternative jabs, such as the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, have been deemed the cause of injury on fewer than five occasions. The Government medicines regulator has linked 81 deaths in the UK to the vaccine with hundreds more people seriously injured.

Mr Scott was the first person in the UK to launch a legal claim against AstraZeneca, forced to do so because the Government payment was utterly insufficient. He is bringing it under the Consumer Protection Act on the basis the vaccine was not as safe as the public expected it to be. The Act sets a high bar of proof and AstraZeneca is robustly defending the claim.

Advertisement


Jamie’s wife Kate – the couple live in the West Midlands – has, somewhat reluctantly, become an outspoken campaigner on behalf of her husband and other victims. Three years on from the catastrophic injuries he suffered 10 days after having the jab on April 23, 2021, Mrs Scott says: “Although pharmaceutical companies do much good that does not mean they have no ethical responsibility for when it goes wrong. So far, they have shown no compassion or concern for those that have been injured by the vaccine. All lives should be seen as equal, no injury or loss should be seen as an acceptable consequence just because it saved more than it harmed.

“AstraZeneca have all the resources – such as money and a large legal team – but we have the truth. Our truth is that for my family and others this vaccine caused serious harm and death and it is not OK to continue to ignore that.”


Jamie Scott and his wife Kate have waged a war to get fair compensation for themselves and other victims of the jab CREDIT: Andrew Fox
Sarah Moore, a partner at law firm Leigh Day which is bringing the legal claims, is exasperated that Big Pharma, underwritten by the Government, refuses to settle.

“It is very difficult to understand why the Government does not engage on this issue.” she says. “AstraZeneca have admitted generic causation, and in the majority of cases within the group [of claimants] the Government’s medical panel has confirmed that ‘on the balance of probabilities’ the vaccine has caused the injuries and deaths suffered. Yet still the Government and AstraZeneca fight this battle rather than resolve these claims.

“That is bad for our clients, bad for public health policy and bad for the taxpayer, because it is the Government and not AstraZeneca who will have to resolve the legal claim. No one senior in the Government has engaged on these issues. The group [of claimants] have been passed between departments.” Some, she adds, have even been told by their constituency MPs that they are unable to speak to them because of the litigation.

Moore warns the Government that footdragging is damaging public confidence in any future vaccine rollout, stressing that “our clients do not wish to engage in a lengthy legal battle with AstraZeneca but the Government’s failure to engage on this issue has left them no choice”.

AstraZeneca finds itself in a bind. Official advice recommended in early April 2021 that its vaccine should not be given to the under 30s and by early May to the under 40s, just too late for Mr Scott.

By the autumn of 2021, the Oxford-AstraZeneca jab had been quietly shelved with more than 90 per cent of jabs by then provided by Pfizer. AstraZeneca had been unable to identify the cause of the clots and the Government bought its Covid vaccines for the next year’s rollout from rivals. In 2021, AstraZeneca had supplied almost 50 million doses. But by November 2022, out of 40.5 million people who had received a third dose, just 58,700 came from AstraZeneca.

The drug company is bound by ongoing legal action and declines to be drawn on what is a highly emotive case. A spokesman says: “Our sympathy goes out to anyone who has lost loved ones or reported health problems. Patient safety is our highest priority and regulatory authorities have clear and stringent standards to ensure the safe use of all medicines, including vaccines.

“From the body of evidence in clinical trials and real-world data, the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine has continuously been shown to have an acceptable safety profile and regulators around the world consistently state that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of extremely rare potential side effects.”

The company recognises the potential damage caused to its reputation by the legal action. It feels hard done by. It was the Government that pushed for a vaccine rollout at speed and that encouraged the population to get jabbed, not just to reduce symptoms but for the greater good of the whole of society. In reality, the evidence remains unclear about the extent to which any of the vaccines stopped transmission (Experts suggest that the Covid vaccines prevented transmission for around 70 days after the jab).

As AstraZeneca stresses, this was a vaccine first developed at Oxford and which it then did its duty and made available on a huge industrial scale to the UK and the rest of the world. Millions of lives were saved but that benefit, the cheers at Wimbledon, the gongs for the scientists, have all gone to Oxford. The stinging criticism has been reserved for AstraZeneca while in the background the Government keeps its distance and its counsel.

Even though it encouraged AstraZeneca, based in Cambridge, to enter into the deal – the claim is Boris Johnson’s administration wanted the vaccine to be an all-British affair – ministers have so far refused to intervene. They could increase the Government’s own compensation deal or else step in now and settle the class action being brought against AstraZeneca. The sums are not huge, maybe as much as £100m in total compensation. But with every day the Government refuses to intervene, the legal bills go up while the victims get nothing.

• 
  
  please log in to view this image
• Catholic Church to open more schools amid plans to scrap 50pc limit
  
  
  please log in to view this image
• Live Ukrainian drone blasts set Russian oil refinery ablaze
  
  
  please log in to view this image
• Riot police storm Columbia campus and drag pro-Palestine protesters from barricade
  
  
  please log in to view this image
• China’s super carrier Fujian is almost ready to challenge the mighty US Navy for top spot
  
  please log in to view this image
• Poll of the week: Who should succeed Humza Yousaf as SNP leader?
  
  
  please log in to view this image

More from The Telegraph
GP struck off after having sex with multiple women at his surgery in working hours

please log in to view this image

Slavery did not make Britain rich, finds report

please log in to view this image

Ukraine-Russia war live: Trump tells Nato 'you're on your own' if they don't increase spending

please log in to view this image

Don’t knock feminism – having children is about personal priorities

please log in to view this image

Cameron gives the Lords their first jolt of erotic joy in years

please log in to view this image

Boy, 14, killed in daylight sword rampage

please log in to view this image

© Telegraph Media Group Limited 2024 - Manage Cookies

 

US shared ‘gobsmacking’ Covid lab leak file with UK
Evidence supporting theory was presented to Dominic Raab, then the Foreign Secretary – but ‘was ignored’

Tony Diver, US EDITOR4 May 2024 • 8:00pm

please log in to view this image

The US shared “gobsmacking” evidence with Britain at the height of the Covid pandemic suggesting a “high likelihood” that the virus had leaked from a Chinese lab, The Telegraph can reveal.

In January 2021, Five Eyes intelligence-sharing nations were convened to discuss the possibility of a lab leak as the US warned that China had covered up research on coronaviruses and military activity at a laboratory in Wuhan.

In a previously unreported phone call that month, Mike Pompeo, the former US secretary of state, presented evidence that supported the lab leak theory to Dominic Raab, then the Foreign Secretary, and representatives from Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

Speaking to The Telegraph, two Trump administration officials accused Mr Raab and the UK Government of ignoring the lab leak theory because of resistance from government scientists who supported the explanation that the virus had jumped between animals and humans.

Mr Pompeo presented a summary of classified American intelligence reports collected in the early days of the pandemic and compiled by the State Department. The intelligence reports themselves are understood to have been shared separately with the UK via the Five Eyes network between October and December 2020.

“We saw several pieces of information and thought that they were, frankly, gobsmacking,” said one former official who worked on the intelligence that informed Mr Pompeo’s report. “They obviously pointed to the high likelihood that this was indeed a lab leak.”

please log in to view this image

Dominic Raab and Mike Pompeo, the then US secretary of state, in 2020 CREDIT: Kirsty O'Connor/PA Archive
In one document, which has since been released by the State Department under Freedom of Information laws, US officials warned of “consistent stonewalling” by China after the virus was first discovered and accused local officials of “gross corruption and ineptitude”.

The research revealed for the first time that Chinese military officials had worked with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in the years leading up to the pandemic, and that some researchers at the lab had become ill shortly before the virus was first recorded nearby.

Advertisement

please log in to view this image

Did you know you have a bonus subscription? Gift yours today
Find out more

It also showed that Chinese scientists had carried out “gain of function” research at the institute, which has since become a key piece of evidence for the lab leak theory.

The theory has become a divisive topic among scientists and government officials in the years following the pandemic and has prompted two investigations by the World Health Organisation, which China has been accused of obstructing.

British government ministers including Boris Johnson initially dismissed the possibility that Covid had been created by scientists, arguing in June 2021 that “the advice that we have had is that it doesn’t look as though this particular disease of zoonotic origin came from a lab”.

Two former officials claimed the UK had ignored the evidence presented by the US because ministers saw the lab leak claims as a “radioactive American political issue” fuelled by public disagreement between government scientists and Donald Trump.

“Once the thing became fundamentally political, the ability to pursue it internationally really just collapsed because no one else was interested in touching it,” said one of the officials. “I think [Five Eyes] were kind of annoyed by the way the issue had become treated in US politics.”

Both separately named Sir Jeremy Farrar, a member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies as one of the leading opponents of the lab leak theory within the British government.

A majority of scientific experts have long said that they believe an animal to human interaction was the most likely cause of the first infection.

However, some Government figures, including Michael Gove, have since said that they believe the virus was “man-made”.

In November, Mr Gove told the Covid Inquirythat there was a “significant body of judgment that believes that the virus itself was man-made – and that presents its own set of challenges”.

please log in to view this image

Both the FBI and US Department of Energy have said they believe a lab leak is the most likely cause of Covid, while other agencies have said they think it occurred naturally.

Joe Biden, the US president, has said he does not know where the virus started, while the US National Intelligence Council said last year it “probably emerged and infected humans through an initial small-scale exposure”.

UK ministers are now facing calls to expand the terms of the Covid Inquiry to include an investigation into the origin of the virus.

The Telegraph understands that the call in Jan 2021 was deliberately held on an “open line” without security encryption in the hope that Chinese intelligence agencies would hear that Western countries were aware of military activity in Wuhan.

“We did that deliberately…we wanted to put pressure on the bad guys,” said a State Department source.

Ten days after the call, in which officials said the UK was unwilling to assist with a US-led lab leak investigation or share its own research, the summary compiled by Mr Pompeo’s officials was released to the public in a “fact sheet”.

Those involved in the release said they took care to avoid revealing the sources or methods of US spy agencies, and that it was just the “tip of the iceberg” of the underlying intelligence that had been gathered.

A UK government spokesman said: “There are still questions that need to be answered about the origin and spread of Covid-19, not least so we can ensure we are better prepared for future pandemics.

Advertisement
“The UK continues to support the World Health Organisation in its expert study of the origins of Covid-19. It is important that China and other countries cooperate fully with the researchers

 

Withdrawn….why?
All a conspiracy we were told…..


AstraZeneca withdrawing Covid vaccine, months after admitting rare side effect
Company says decision is purely commercial as jab has been superseded by alternatives

Robert Mendick, CHIEF REPORTER and Patrick Sawer, SENIOR NEWS REPORTER7 May 2024 • 9:22pm

please log in to view this image

The Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid vaccine is being withdrawn worldwide, months after the pharmaceutical giant admitted for the first time in court documents that it can cause a rare and dangerous side effect.

The vaccine can no longer be used in the European Union, after the company voluntarily withdrew its “marketing authorisation”. The application to withdraw the vaccine was made on March 5 and came into effect on Tuesday.

Similar applications will be made in the coming months in the UK and in other countries that had approved the vaccine, known as Vaxzevria.

The decision to withdraw it brings to an end the use of the jab, which was heralded by Boris Johnson as a “triumph for British science” and credited with saving more than six million lives.

AstraZeneca said the vaccine was being removed from markets for commercial reasons. It said the vaccine was no longer being manufactured or supplied, having been superseded by updated vaccines that tackle new variants.

Advertisement
Vaxzevria has come under intense scrutiny in recent months over a very rare side effect, which causes blood clots and low blood platelet counts. AstraZeneca admitted in court documents lodged with the High Court in February that the vaccine “can, in very rare cases, cause TTS”.

TTS – which stands for Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome – has been linked to at least 81 deaths in the UK as well as hundreds of serious injuries. AstraZeneca is being sued by more than 50 alleged victims and grieving relatives in a High Court case.

But Astrazeneca has insisted the decision to withdraw the vaccine is not linked to the court case or its admission that it can cause TTS. It said the timing was pure coincidence.

In a statement the company said: “We are incredibly proud of the role Vaxzevria played in ending the global pandemic. According to independent estimates, over 6.5 million lives were saved in the first year of use alone and over three billion doses were supplied globally.

“Our efforts have been recognised by governments around the world and are widely regarded as being a critical component of ending the global pandemic.

“As multiple, variant Covid-19 vaccines have since been developed, there is a surplus of available updated vaccines. This has led to a decline in demand for Vaxzevria, which is no longer being manufactured or supplied. AstraZeneca has therefore taken the decision to initiate withdrawal of the marketing authorisations for Vaxzevria within Europe.

Advertisement
“We will now work with regulators and our partners to align on a clear path forward to conclude this chapter and significant contribution to the Covid-19 pandemic.”

The Telegraph has been told that the company will withdraw marketing authorisations in other countries, including the UK, where it has regulatory approval. AstraZeneca never had approval for the vaccine to be used in the US.

The company said: “We will partner with regulatory authorities globally to initiate marketing authorisation withdrawals for Vaxzevria, where no future commercial demand for the vaccine is expected.”

The Government largely stopped using the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine by the autumn of 2021, by which time it had supplied about 50 million doses in the UK. It was replaced in the UK with Pfizer and Moderna jabs in time for the winter booster campaign at the end of 2021.

Marco Cavaleri, head of vaccines at the European Medicines Agency, the body which is responsible for drug and medicine safety within the EU, told Italian media: “The authorisation of the anti-Covid vaccine Vaxzevria by AstraZeneca will be withdrawn and the process has already officially started with the European Commission. This is in line with the expectations that no-longer-used and updated vaccines will be withdrawn, as per our indication.”

Advertisement
Mr Cavaleri said he expected all the ‘monovalent’ vaccines – which dealt only with the original Wuhan strain – to be withdrawn in time.

AstraZeneca accepted the vaccine can cause TTS in a legal document in February this year. The causal mechanism is not known.

please log in to view this image

Workers producing the vaccine in October 2021 CREDIT: JOHN LAWRENCE
Lawyers for claimants in the High Court case argue that the drug caused vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT) – a subset of TTS – and that it was not as safe as individuals were entitled to expect. Astrazeneca has always insisted that “patient safety is our highest priority”.

The company has said: “From the body of evidence in clinical trials and real-world data, the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine has continuously been shown to have an acceptable safety profile and regulators around the world consistently state that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of extremely rare potential side effects.”

But Kate Scott, whose husband Jamie was left with a permanent brain injury after having the vaccine and who was the first person in the UK to bring a legal action, said: “AstraZeneca’s Covid vaccine no longer being used in the UK or Europe, and soon the rest of the world, means no one else will suffer from this awful adverse reaction.

Advertisement
“They say it is for commercial reasons, but maybe it’s because it can no longer be seen as being within the acceptable safety parameters, with 445 confirmed cases of VITT, 81 of these fatal in the UK alone.”

Mr Scott, 47, a father-of-two, who has had to give up work, said: “This is good news, but I will always wish they had, like they did in other countries, paused it in the UK after just one case. More lives could have been saved and I would not be suffering the way I am.”

please log in to view this image

Mr Scott, pictured with his wife, wishes the vaccine had been withdrawn much earlier CREDIT: ANDREW FOX
Sarah Moore, a partner at law firm Leigh Day, which is bringing the legal claims, said: “To those who we represent, all of whom have suffered bereavement or serious injury as a result of the AstraZeneca vaccine, this decision to withdraw marketing authorisation, ending the usage of the AstraZeneca vaccine in the EU, will be welcomed.

“It will be seen as a decision linked with AstraZeneca’s recent admission that the vaccine can cause TTS, and the fact that regulators across the world suspended or stopped usage of the vaccine following concerns regarding TTS.

“This is an important regulatory step, but still our clients remain without fair compensation. We will continue to fight for the compensation our clients need and campaign for reform of the vaccine damage payment scheme.”

The scheme, run by the Government, has paid out to victims. But it has been branded inadequate, prompting them to bring separate civil claims against AstraZeneca, which the drugs firm is contesting.

 

It says why in the article, did you have trouble reading it?

 

very insightful, thanks for posting

 

Well obviously 6 feet social distancing was made up

 

I think most of it was made up in the panic ….”we must been seen to do something!”